Hi Bob!bobharmony wrote: ↑Sun Mar 28, 2021 6:15 pm Carles
I have just begun working with Siril as an alternative to DSS this past week, and am also liking what I am seeing so far. It seems that the stack produced by Siril shows a bit more detail than the DSS result. My particular interest is in Siril's capacity to apply background extraction from individual subs before stacking, as I image in a very light-polluted area and gradients are complex and fierce after stacking in DSS. Early results are promising but there is more testing to follow. I will be watching this thread with interest.
Yes I'm quite intrigued so far about the differences.
I stack using the scrip " OSC_Preprocessing"
this is what comes out when stacking
"Integration of 206 images:
15:26:36: Pixel combination ......... average
15:26:36: Normalization ............. additive + scaling
15:26:36: Pixel rejection ........... Winsorized sigma clipping
15:26:36: Rejection parameters ...... low=3.000 high=3.000
15:26:37: Background noise value (channel: #0): 1.181 (1.803e-05)
15:26:37: Background noise value (channel: #1): 1.103 (1.684e-05)
15:26:37: Background noise value (channel: #2): 1.180 (1.800e-05)
15:26:37: Saving FITS: file ../result.fit, 3 layer(s), 6080x4048 pixels"
So it seems it does Normalization, which I don't know to what point is good or not. I think to remember usually not recommended for StarTools but I don't know.
Haven't tested manual stacking parameters , so far only the default script and it looks pretty good to me...
What I don't like much is that it makes quite a lot of "mess" with files, not a mess as in disorganized but rather the amount of storage used!!
I've stacked 206 images, using 33 darks 30 dark flats and 2 master flats (haven't got the original flats since this is from few months back and I'm using different Gain/Offset so didn't see a point on keeping them.
Point is; I've used Drizzle processing this time and the "Process " folder has 82 Gb!!! worth of files! The final file , usually called "Target" <--- FYI, after stacking better change the name or make a copy, as it will overwritte it next stack.. <-- that is using the script, if you do manual I guess you can just select a file name.
So it makes a lot of in termediate files.. even more than ASTAP I think. But this time since it was drizzle, each file was resized so from the original 12mb , each file drizzled is 288mb. Might be a problem depending on the available disk space. But you can always keep emptying this folder after the stack.
I am stacking other old files, and they look better so far as well.
Will keep testing! ^^
If you guys do too, let me know what are the results and or settings used : )